I read an article about why it isn’t necessary to hate Ukrainian nationalists, and I can say that it is difficult to disagree with its general idea. Although I would make some essential specifications that, as a result, can change the concept of the article…

However, at first I will say what I agree with, for the reasons far from what inspired the author. So – about hatred, or more precisely, about its destructiveness.

Firstly, as is known, before becoming a part of the Soviet people, Russians in Russia were defined exclusively by the principle of creed. If someone is an Orthodox Christian, then it means they are Russian. There were almost no problems with this, because in Rus since time immemorial Orthodox Christians were all those Slavs living within its borders (Polish Catholics were attached only in the 19th century, and even then it was in accordance with the rights of a personal union — the All-Russian emperor was at the same time a Polish king). Baptised Muslims and Jews, converted representatives of the small peoples of the North, and also the Protestants who passed into Orthodoxy made up a small part of society and were quickly Russified, being more Russian already in the second generation than the most native Russian (directly from the Rurik Varangians).

There was a small problem with Georgians, who were Orthodox Christians, but at the same time they obviously weren’t Russians. But Georgians lived in the Caucasus, they had a separate church, they were very little in empire scales. In addition, common enemies united everyone, as well as the common tradition of hospitality, and only the tradition of small national conceit that generated the saying “In Georgia everyone is a prince” caused non-malicious irony, like concerning a relative who is too emotional.

Soviet people haven’t been present since 1992. We come back to the origins. Even a considerable part of communists returned to Orthodox Christianity. That’s why the Russian Orthodox Christian again becomes actual for modern Russia. And Orthodox Christianity teaches us: “Vengeance is mine, I will repay”. I.e., God, as the highest judge, demands from believers not to encroach on his right to make a final verdict, trying to rescue everyone up to the end, even the most stray person, the inveterate sinner. The belief uniting us into Russian people forbids us to hate.

From this point of view, there can’t be any hatred towards Ukrainian nationalists.

Secondly, there can’t be hatred towards Ukrainian nationalists from Russians who were born and grew up as citizens of the Russian Federation. There can be ironic pity, maybe even contempt, there can even be gratitude. But from where could the feeling of hatred appear if Ukrainian nationalists did for the revival of Russia almost more than Russians themselves?

After all, it is precisely Ukrainian nationalists who weren’t able in ideal hothouse conditions to use the potential of the Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic that they inherited to build a powerful Ukrainian state. But such an opportunity existed – creating a political nation from Crimeans, Donetsk citizens, Kharkov citizens, Kiev citizens, Odessa citizens, and Galicians is much simpler than from the Chukchi, Kamchadals, Yakuts, Chechens, Karelians, the Komi, Russians, Mordva, Udmurts, Tatars, the Bashkir, Ossetians, and others, including dozens of Dagestan nationalities. The economy of the Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic was comparable in terms of its volume to the economy of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR), and it was far ahead in terms of technological effectiveness and innovation. The army was even more numerous and armed with the most modern (at that time) weapons. Its scientific potential conceded a little, but in some areas it was exclusive. In addition, the country was much more compact, with a developed transport infrastructure and high transit potential.

Everything rested only on the creation of a political nation from which in 50-100 years a new ethnos would grow – very similar to Russians, however not Russian, but competitive in relation to Russians. Ukraine is a natural competitor of Russia and can’t be anything else.

Brzezinski – a clever, but accentuated in his hatred towards Russia Pole (with American nationality) – claimed that Russia is not an empire without Ukraine. This is not the truth. Russia became an empire already under Ivan III, when 150-300 years remained until the inclusion in its structure of separate parts of Ukraine (and Galicia – 450 years). It is Lithuania (The Grand Duchy of Lithuania) and Poland (Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth) that, as soon as they once included Ukraine into their structures, started laying claim to the status of the universal Eastern Slavic empire, and after losing it they became ordinary marginal limitrophes.

But the creation of a political nation demanded only the preservation of Russian as one of two state languages and the recognition of Russians as one of the state-building people of Ukraine. And that’s all. In two-three generations another ethos would live in Ukraine, and even the Ukrainian Russian language would differ from the Russian Russian language (in the conditions of separate development, languages gradually diverge). But the competent use of economic potential, the geopolitical situation, and the contradictions between Russia and the US/EU gave the chance to not only preserve and increase economic potential, but even to enter the EU and NATO on their own conditions, which in the very least were no worse than the ones Poland had.

In order to understand what the potential of Ukraine was in this regard, it is enough to look at how the West starts caressing Lukashenko as soon as he makes any conciliatory statement. But after all, in 1992 Belarus in terms of its possibilities was as far from Ukraine as modern Lithuania was from Germany. Now everything is on the contrary.

Ukrainian nationalists, because of their sharovarshchina [aggressive promotion of Ukrainian folk culture – ed], provincialism, frank tribalism, and the emergence in the world of myths and ethnographic rarities, frittered away all opportunities for the creation on the foundations of Ukraine of a second Russian state, which would inevitably (due to the will of the political and economic competition) become anti-Russian. In addition to this, they aggressively shouted at Russia and persistently called the West for a crusade on the Kremlin so much so that they eventually forced the Russian people and Russian elites, having felt the danger of death, to unite and to return to Russia the status of a superstate in the shortest possible time. If it wasn’t for the stupid frankness of Ukrainian nationalists, who all day long dreamed about the disintegration and occupation of Russia, the cautious West could continue to convince Moscow for two-three years more of its negotiability. But in our conditions 2-3 years can become critical.

Thirdly, hatred assumes the elimination of a subject of hatred. This feeling is too strong to live with for a long time. It destroys the organism (both the individual person and the whole state). It is most favorable to make a friend from any enemy — the combined resource not only grows twice, but the cumulative effect also starts working. If the friendship doesn’t work out, then there is a need to neutralise it. Perhaps it won’t bring additional resources, but there also won’t be resource expenses. And lastly, if affairs with the enemy are too bad and there is indeed a need to destroy them, then it is better to do it without anger and partiality, and you mustn’t at all tell your enemy in advance how much you hate them.

If in Crimea, Donbass, Kharkov, or Odessa it wasn’t foreknown how Ukrainian nationalists dream of making these territories “Ukrainian or deserted”, then most likely the Kiev regime wouldn’t face such rigid resistance, which it wasn’t able to suppress everywhere. After all, Crimea didn’t move to Russia when power was seized by Yushchenko (although he made two coups: in 2004/5 and in 2007). People would hope as usual for the best until they find themselves in a concentration camp. And then it will be too late. But the nazis shouted about their hatred and their plans on all squares and intersections, and then were terribly surprised about why they aren’t loved that much and for some reason are met by weapons in hands.

And fourthly, thanks to the sharp intellectual insufficiency of Ukrainian nationalists, the idea of moderate, civilised, constructive, European Ukrainian nationalism – the realisation of which was more dangerous for Russia than all the artful plans of the US, because it had to feed itself off the juice of Russia and not invoke fear in Russia, and, at the critical moment, to plunge a knife into Russia’s back – was forever hopelessly compromised. From now on, Ukrainian nationalism for everyone (even for Poles) has only one horrible Banderist grin, it stands up to its knees in blood and demands from everyone to worship its Banderist Moloch, otherwise it threatens to bite.

At this juncture we will move on to what is constructive.

Over decades we said to our western friends and partners that by feeding and raising Banderism they create Golem, who, having tried to bite Russia and having thus broken its teeth, will lunge at them. They didn’t believe it. But it lunged. Ukraine seriously argues about a possible war with Hungary for Transcarpathia. Ukraine increases the tension in relations with Poland, where the attitude towards Ukrainians is nearly worse than it was towards the Germans in 1945. Ukraine accuses Germany of betraying Ukrainian-European interests and brought the matter to the level that the Germans, French, and Poles – who created, fostered, and defended the current Ukrainian authorities – sleep and see that somebody liberates them from these authorities and from this Ukraine. And from their point of view Russia must become this somebody. Even the US, the presidential electoral campaign of which Kiev impudently interfered in by openly supporting Hillary Clinton, tries to get rid of this toxic asset, having once again dumped it on Russia. At the same time, Trump, like a zealous master, also wants to receive “compensation” from Moscow for this.

The West already understood that Ukraine is a big encumbrance, but they aren’t yet ready to work together [with Russia – ed] to eliminate this encumbrance. And all these “people with beautiful faces” who “aren’t guilty of anything” because they “simply came under the influence of western propaganda” today become our situational allies. They – every day and hour, by their very existence and vigorous publicistic and political activity, during communication with western colleagues – convince our friends and partners that they have no other way out besides convincing Russia of the need for collective action aimed at eliminating Banderism. They propose to ask Russia to save them from their own creation, but they don’t propose to agree to give Russia some room to manoeuvre in Ukraine in exchange for some little favours in other places.

When the West finally understands that it’s not they who will receive payment for Ukraine, but, on the contrary, they will have to pay to receive help in getting rid of it, and when the West is ready for any conditions, it is at this moment that it will be possible to discuss the problem and develop an algorithm to solve it. An algorithm that is mutually advantageous for all, except Ukrainian nationalists of course.

From this point of view, indeed, there is no need to corner the rat of Ukrainian Nazism, which lunged at its western patrons, thrashing it strongly with a stick from the East. Otherwise then it will again turn out that it is us [Russians – ed] who are the “violators of conventions”, “invaders”, “stranglers of freedom”, and “a threat to international peace”.

In Syria we helped Assad to win the civil war, and now we act as peacekeepers and intermediaries creating the opportunity for some to repent, and giving the chance to others to forgive (not always and not everyone), without being afraid of the harmful consequences of our warm-heartedness. In civil war the people are divided into two parts and fight to the death. If reconciliation doesn’t arrive, then either two nations appear, or all people disappear. As a rule, losses (not only and even not so much human ones, but material, moral, political, structural losses) are too great for the state to remain standing, even if the winners destroyed all those who were defeated.

Only an unbiased intermediary that both parties trust (even if the trust of one of them is compelled by a desperate situation) can save the people or at least what remains of the people who once made up the nation. At the beginning of the Ukrainian crisis the West was an “honest broker”, ready to arbitrate not only the parties to the standoff in Ukraine, but even Ukraine vis-a-vis Russia. Now Russia has the opportunity to become the arbitration judge restoring justice both in Ukraine and in Russia’s relationship with the West.

It is exactly this position that Anglo-Saxons sought to occupy and successfully exploited for centuries. And we could learn from our own experience just how practical and favorable this is. Of course, any emotion, especially such a strong emotion as hatred, doesn’t promote constructive, pragmatic work.

The last part of this comment is devoted to what is necessary.

I think that I wouldn’t be mistaken if I said that when Andrey Manchuk was writing his article, he was addressing not the inhabitants of Vologda or Tutaev, who even if they remember periodically about Ukraine, they do it less and less frequently because news from Ukraine became boring and it relevance started being reduced by fresher and sharper events in global policy long ago. And anyway, they don’t hate anyone unless maybe they are surprised by the stupidity and impracticality of abstract Banderists. Manchuk’s article speaks about the eradication of hatred as a natural and necessary condition for the end of civil war. I.e., the hatred of anti-fascists towards Ukrainian nazis, including those who didn’t kill children in Donbass and didn’t burn “Berkut” on Maidan (although they did jump on it). Towards those who created the ideology of the regime, theoretically justifying its right to murder dissenters, and who wrote articles and filmed TV programs that call to murder those who possess a different viewpoint.

In this regard Manchuk’s article is nothing more than a starry-eyed appeal to herons to not eat frogs, because frogs aren’t to blame for the fact that they were born in this way.

Before 2014 in Western Ukraine, in the very Banderist den, anti-Banderist villages existed (I think that they still exist today). And there were also many anti-fascists too (and they remain). Although now they, of course, are fewer in number than they were before. These people, or their ancestors, suffered from Banderists in the 1940’s-1950’s. And they hated them even more strongly than Crimea or Donbass did after 2014.

In the Russian-speaking regions of Ukraine there was a hatred for abstract Banderism as a phenomenon. This is why we hate German Nazism, which brought death to each of our families, but we treat modern Germans normally. But the enemies of Banderism in Western Ukraine hated specific people who killed their relatives, they hated their descendants who didn’t repent for the sins of their fathers and grandfathers, but they apprehended their ideas as theirs and only bided their time. This hatred lasted decades, like an Italian vendetta, leading to sporadic excesses in the most safe years of the Soviet power.

But now the same thing has happened to all of Ukraine. The lives of tens of millions of people have been destroyed. Some were killed, some lost their jobs, some migrated, some were forced to leave the country for economic motives, some live in daily fear for their own life and the lives of their relatives. The marginal abomination that emerged from the bottom of society – dreaming only of satiating itself and sleeping comfortably, doing nothing – teaches normal people how to live. Bulgakov’s Sharikov is a demonstration of the softest and most harmless form of discomfort that is felt by a normal person when they face a rabble exulting in their own permissiveness.

Currently civil war in Ukraine is localised in Donbass. But it is bursting out into the expanses of the entire country. The fight between elite groups in Kiev already reached such a limit where power can’t be claimed without bloodshed. Even if Poroshenko isn’t able to find enough support to try to forcefully hold on to power, and even if it will be possible to overthrow him rather peacefully, it’s unlikely that his fate will inspire his successor. Anyone who comes to power after Poroshenko will fall into the same vicious circle from which there is already no exit. Anyone will face the same hatred of elite groups and the population, only it will happen earlier because there won’t be any more western loans – allowing to smoothen internal contradictions, and the internal reserve of system durability has been exhausted. The arrival of civil war to Kiev, Dnepropetrovsk, Vinnytsia, and Lvov, and its return to Kharkov and Odessa is a matter of time and not of principle.

As long as the accumulated hatred hasn’t found a way out and blood is still being shed, as long as those who are incapable of forgiving and aren’t interested in repenting haven’t yet satisfied their thirst for revenge or haven’t yet been killed in battles, then civil war can’t end.

And external intervention won’t help here. External forces can help to stabilise a country that is ready to be stabilised, but they aren’t capable of stopping a civil conflict that hasn’t yet exhausted itself. On the contrary, by standing in the middle of the conflicting parties, they evoke the hatred of this or that party because they prevent them from grabbing each other by the throat.

As was said above, Russia and the West have yet to agree on how to bring order in Ukraine through joint efforts, who will receive what from it, and who will pay for it and how much will it cost. This means that stabilising external forces will appear on the territory of Ukraine with a very big delay.

Regular states, regular armies, and regular police formations don’t exact revenge. They prosecute or create conditions for national trials. But, as we saw in Syria, intermediary peacekeepers come only where one of the parties to the conflict is ready to surrender, but is afraid of revenge and thus wants guarantees from an external force. As long as the parties aren’t satiated with blood, and as long as someone isn’t in a desperate situation, then there is nothing intermediaries can do here. And for people who were deprived of their kin and meaning of life by the nazis, it is useless to talk about forgiveness, reconciliation, and about the malignancy of revenge. Having received the opportunity to exact revenge, they will do exactly this. And the opportunity will appear for them as soon as different groups of the Kiev regime claw each other and won’t be able to stand together against anti-fascists anymore.

So, the appeal to reject hatred and to understand and forgive can only be supported as a very moral and even pragmatic one. But it is necessary to understand that it isn’t realisable in an absolute form. The enemy is forgiven (not always and not everyone) when they repent. The enemy must suffer defeat in order to realise the depth of their mistakes and crimes, since winners don’t reflect on things. However, victory is won on the battlefield, where even the soldiers of regular armies in the heat of battle, becoming hardened from losses, forget about the Vienna and Geneva conventions and the majority of them aren’t prosecuted for this. But in civil war, where the armed citizens of the destroyed country fight against each other, no norms of international law work in general.

It is possible to condemn Ukrainian military personnel, representatives of the special services, police officers, and politicians for violating the Constitution, waging war against their own people, and shelling peaceful cities. But it is impossible to condemn the citizens of a destroyed state who armed themselves in self-defense. They acted in the conditions of a force majeure and had no possibility to fulfil the requirements of international legislation on the norms and rules of war.

We are responsible for those who we tamed. Europe considered that it tamed Ukrainian nazis. Europe was mistaken. Europe doesn’t know what to do with them, but it doesn’t want to take part in their soft disposal, ensuring the transfer of power from them to adequate politicians and their evacuation either to Poland or Canada. There is no place for them to flee and they can’t govern anymore. They ate the Ukrainian state and it, being eaten, can’t provide them with protection any more. But they also can’t hand over power without bloodshed, having seized it as a result of a bloody coup. This means that their disposal will take place in a hard format, because too much hatred accumulated in society for it to be possible to just apologise and pretend that nothing happened.

Thus, the “people with beautiful faces” who stood for “everything good and against everything bad” will also fail to come out unscathed. It won’t happen to all of them, but it will happen all the same. It always happens like this. Nobody knows any artillerists who manhandled the shells that destroyed cities and killed people in Donbass by sight. If they don’t boast about their “feats” too much, then nobody will file a lawsuit against them. But the journalists who justified Nazism, the volunteers raising money to help punishers, and the social network activists waging a propaganda war are known by many. And for some of them, their luck will simply run out.

And then, of course, who in Moscow, Vladivostok, Murmansk, or Sochi will want to spoil their nerves by having hatred for Ukrainian nationalists? They gifted us Crimea, and this isn’t their last gift.

The Essential Saker II: Civilizational Choices and Geopolitics / The Russian challenge to the hegemony of the AngloZionist Empire

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to get more info on formatting

(1) Leave the name field empty if you want to post as Anonymous. It's preferable that you choose a name so it becomes clear who said what. E-mail address is not mandatory either. The website automatically checks for spam. Please refer to our moderation policies for more details. We check to make sure that no comment is mistakenly marked as spam. This takes time and effort, so please be patient until your comment appears. Thanks.

(2) 10 replies to a comment are the maximum.

(3) Here are formating examples which you can use in your writing:
<b>bold text</b> results in bold text
<i>italic text</i> results in italic text
(You can also combine two formating tags with each other, for example to get bold-italic text.)
<em>emphasized text</em> results in emphasized text
<strong>strong text</strong> results in strong text
<q>a quote text</q> results in a quote text (quotation marks are added automatically)
<cite>a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited</cite> results in:a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited
<blockquote>a heavier version of quoting a block of text...</blockquote> results in:

a heavier version of quoting a block of text that can span several lines. Use these possibilities appropriately. They are meant to help you create and follow the discussions in a better way. They can assist in grasping the content value of a comment more quickly.

and last but not least:
<a href=''http://link-address.com''>Name of your link</a> results in Name of your link

(4)No need to use this special character in between paragraphs:&nbsp;You do not need it anymore. Just write as you like and your paragraphs will be separated.The "Live Preview" appears automatically when you start typing below the text area and it will show you how your comment will look like before you send it.

(5) If you now think that this is too confusing then just ignore the code above and write as you like.

35 Comments

Lemme start by thanking the author and translator for an extremely en!ightening article.

On the second hand, let me introduce the concept, that there is such a thing as too much information.

That is the most compelling argument against global governace IMO.

Look.

The events described in this piece might be factual from a certain point of view…and factual from another.

Yet, completely irrelevant from the third.

The more I think about the feasibility of a universal solution to the challenges we face, or even describing the challenges themselves, the more I lean towards the Swiss adoption of the republican principle.

The equation the author describes have no computable solution. Too any variables in time, space and genetics.

There needs to be a simplification to either or all of the above variables to come to a solution of the puzzle.

Of course, I am biased. I is Russian. And Hungarian. And Californian. And a gun-effin nut. And a hystory buff, whose one half of the family participated in this and the other half of the family participated on the other side of the last burning of our civilisation.

Would like to avoid that if possible, but if unavoidable, let the festivities begin. I am seriously bored, unafraid and frankly mad about being threatend with destruction, while the actual destruction of my society I witness on a daily basis.

Again, let the festivities begin.

The Maxim was bad enough. Nukes…

Now we got women in combat – If that is not the most suicidal idea I have no idea.

My solution?

Localise!

There is no left and right
No dems and reps

There are just peeps you can share with and peeps, that have nothing to share with you, but bs stories.

You can not know everyone intimately, but like a 150 or so people in a lifetime in a shared p!ace.

That is about the size of our harddrive it seems.

So, aside from doing no harm to strangers, concentrate on he local.

Yeah, the unmovable mover.

So the Rus is complicated. Sure.

You think Latvia is less so?

About a million and a half of Latvians in this world, ready to eff each other up over ideology.

Not even wealth.

Ideas. Sometimes true, sometimes false.

The Stranger within my gate,
He may be true or kind,
But he does not talk my talk–
I cannot feel his mind.
I see the face and the eyes and the mouth,
But not the soul behind.
The men of my own stock,
They may do ill or well,
But they tell the lies I am wanted to,
They are used to the lies I tell;
And we do not need interpreters
When we go to buy or sell.
The Stranger within my gates,
He may be evil or good,
But I cannot tell what powers control–
What reasons sway his mood;
Nor when the Gods of his far-off land
Shall repossess his blood.
The men of my own stock,
Bitter bad they may be,
But, at least, they hear the things I hear,
And see the things I see;
And whatever I think of them and their likes
They think of the likes of me.
This was my father’s belief
And this is also mine:
Let the corn be all one sheaf–
And the grapes be all one vine,
Ere our children’s teeth are set on edge
By bitter bread and wine.
– Rudyard Kipling

Take a plane flight from New Orleans to Boston. Get natives of each city to pronounce the names of both cities. For extra fun, take a native from one city to the other, and then watch (and listen) to the fact that they can’t possibly understand the natives of the other city.

So much fun! At Dallas- Ft. Worth Airport, I once had to act as an interpreter between a local cab driver and a very well dressed English black man. Both speaking English but having no idea what each other was saying. I also understand that there are 8, if I remember correctly, distinct dialects around the United States.

Ukraine, at the moment, is a sovereign country(formally at least) even if they are facing troubled times, so why are Russians expected to solve Ukraine’s problems for them?Wouldn’t one normally expect a sovereign nation to solve their own problems, by themselves?

@anon123…. Ukraine may be “sovereign” on a UN register (like Kosovo) but Ukraine is not a country like Russia or Poland or Hungary or Austria. Ukraine is a mistake trying to sort itself out; what biologists call a Chimera, a creature put together from disparate parts. Ukraine is the remnant of Kruschev’s “harebrained schemes”.

But how can they be a ‘sovereign state’ even formally if they are in hock too the west and its agencies such as the IMF and NATO. Ukraine is an occupied state, a failed state, it is no longer a state in the generally accepted sense of the word, it is more like a territory or protectorate, totally dependent on western finance and support.

There is no way this Humpty Dumpty is going to be put together again. Too much bad blood. Do we really expect citizens of the Don Bass are going to hold out a hand of friendship and bonhomie to the Ukronazis who have invaded their land and killed their people?

Let the whole thing disintegrate and turn into a black hole and fragment into little mini-state a la Yugoslavia. Let it also be a warning to those in Russia’s neighbourhood to forget about any future ‘colour revolutions’. Colour revolutions and Russophobia doesn’t put food on the table.

The Ukros are an interesting case in point, because it was exactly their understanding that Soros and the CIA would happily spoon-feed them forever as their due reward. Right in the wake of their glorious Maidan screamfest of panting, jumping, and drooling there was a demonstration demanding instant wage hikes to Western European levels. The malicious glee of the Zionazis everywhere on the planet can readily be imagined. Tsipras and his ”EU without austerity” hogwash spring to mind immediately. Rewarded accordingly.

Yes, this looks very much like an ambitious copy of the Maidan putsch in Kiev with its rent-a-mob bought and paid for at home and abroad, waving US and EU flags (alongside Romanian ones, for good measure) and the mob’s vague sloganeering about ”corruption”. Another country ready for utter destruction and destitution.

My favourite flag-waving was when South Sudan was carved out of Sudan (that has not gone well, poor devils). At the Independence celebrations in Juba, there were as many, possibly more, Israeli flags being waved, as South Sudanese. No others that I recognised, save maybe one or two UN flags. No fakestream presstitute dared to notice, let alone, Bibi forfend, ask why Israeli flags were preferred. That might have led to ‘Thought crime’ and ‘antisemitism’ as the intrepid presstitutes discovered that the break-up of Sudan was promised by Israel after Sudan joined the 1967 war, and thereafter the MOSSAD et al worked feverishly to cause Sudan’s vivisection, an effort they also pursued in Darfur. No-one hates like a Zionazi.

I’m not disagreeing with you, Ukraine is practically a vassal state of the West/Washington, but this fact hasn’t been officially recognized by either USA or Ukraine(or anyone else for that matter), hence informal, so formally Ukraine is a sovereign state, typical of Washington’s vassals and colonies.

As for putting it together again, I’m not so sure, people have gone to war against each other and then have become friends later on, throughout history, for instance how many wars did the Germans and French fight against each other?And more recently wasn’t there a conflict with Chechnya inside the Russian Federation that was solved by granting them special status within the Russian Federation, despite the bloodshed?If Russia can do this why not Ukraine?In fact the Russian President himself proposed this solution to Kiev a couple of months ago, it was reported on RT.Or even more recently in Syria, the SDF was fighting against the Syrian government, earlier, now they are fighting alongside Syrian government forces.There’s not even a need to be friends, a compromise to end the conflict would be good enough.

Those who arrange colour revolutions don’t care whether the local populations have food or not, so it is unlikely they will be discouraged.If anything a newly disintegrated state would mean more potential recruits for terrorist groups run by the same people conducting colour revolutions, groups that will then be used against the Russian Federation.Or alternatively in the event Ukrainian territory becomes part of the Russian Federation, a good amount of people who wish to see the RF broken up will become citizens of the RF, who will then work to destroy Russia from the inside, neither of which is in Russia’s interests.

anon 12309846
That is true. However, analyze the name of Ukraine. It is derived from the Slavic word “Krayina”, which means “frontier region”. Ukraine was Russia’s western frontier. The original Russia was centered in Kiev. There is no historical reason for Ukraine to exist as a sovereign nation.

”There is no reason for Ukraine to exist as a sovereign nation.” And in a purely de facto sense it doesn’t and hever has been. The whole thing has been created like a lego-set construction with bits and pieces added on without rhyme or reason. The western Ukraine was part of the Austro-Hungarian emplire, large parts Lviv being ethnically Polish. Lenin then had the bright idea of incorporating little Russia, Kharkov, Donetsk, Dneporpetrovsk, Nikolaev, Lugansk, in 1922. Then came Stalin’s addition of the western Ukraine in 1945. Then there are Hungarian and Romanian minorities in the west who look toward Hungary and Romania as their natural home. Little wonder that this pantomime horse could never hang together.

It’s not like I’ve anything against Ukraine becoming part of the Russian Federation, if that is what those within Ukraine wants and if the RF finds such a reunion acceptable, but as things stand right now there seems to be a good amount of hostility against Russia(or at least a willingness to throw Russia under the bus for their own gain) inside Ukraine, even accounting for foreign influence and on the other hand I haven’t seen anything indicating Moscow even wants Ukraine back.All nations in the world did not have a historical reason to exist, at some point in history, so that’s not really a strong argument.

But what I asked was, why are Russians expected to solve Ukraine’s problems for them?As things stand right now, Ukraine is a sovereign nation recognized by Moscow, among others, if they can’t even make an official request for assistance from the RF(or join the Russian Federation), I don’t think it’s reasonable to blame Russians for not doing more to solve Ukraine’s problems for them.Russians simply have no obligation to help an entity separate and independent of them.

”Europe considered that it tamed Ukrainian nazis. Europe was mistaken. Europe doesn’t know what to do with them, but it doesn’t want to take part in their soft disposal, ensuring the transfer of power from them to adequate politicians and their evacuation either to Poland or Canada.”

The first sentence quoted comes across as a little ”funny”. The Ukronazi putschists were bankrolled by the Eurocrats; the gorilla Vitaly Klitschko — what happened to him, by the way?— was Merkel’s and Germany’s puppet, whereas the other ”Maidan celebrities” were given both EU and US money. What the Eurocrats did tame most admirably was the average Ukro’s enthusiasm for the EU itself which, correctly, is keeping the Ukros out in the cold, obviously preferring Third World immigration to them, LOL.

It’s definitely true that the West is at a loss as to what to do with its Ukronazi playthings. Handing Crimea to NATO was the latters’ key assignment and it wasn’t accomplished; Crimea is now back where it always belonged. The Ukronazis are violently insane, but now their subjects are quite angry too. Poroshenko and his entourage being granted exile to Canada or, even worse, to Poland would instantly prove that Western imperialism does care for the well-being of the Oligarchy but not for the people ruled by it — a Polish exile in particular would add tremendous insult to injury in the minds of Psheks and Ukros alike.

I claim to be a white separatist. A nationalist, chauvinist, and an overall dyed in the wool alt-right mofo.
I am playing it down, so this post might pass the mods. Please? Pretty please, with sugar on top mods?

Some might even call me a “nazi”….and I would not bat an eye.

What the Ukranian nationalists did and do is an absolute abortion.

Fratricide with intent.

I have no words.

The campaign on “novorussia” was/is, that makes me question my identity as a white man, a nationalist, a logical thinker, a human being.

So you want to separate from the moscovites and their corruption.

Understood.

There are some, who would separate from the kievites and their corruption.

Are their notions not as valid as yours?

Let them go, and be.

Hell, you still speak the same language, married to each other and such…

Be BIG.

Let the bird fly.
Make love, trade, build!

I know, it is too late, the poison is injected, but know this:

You are alone.

Sure, you have your sugardaddies, but every rightous nationalists/patriots around the world rejects your actions.

Interesting article. I understand the articulation, there are few points I would like to comment on. First the history, and I am going to repeat myself and many Russian writers. What’s called Ukraine today was originally Red Rus. Polish historians are clear in saying that In 1410, Jagiełło a Polish king (who became a king by marrying Jadwiga (11yr old?), daughter of deceased Polish King) brought “His Russians” to the battle of Grunwald. They are also clear that He was a Russian speaking, Russian Prince, although from Lithuania. So, the identity of Lithuania in those days and before is also quite well established – Russian. Poland started to move in on Galicja after it elected some Hungarian kings as it’s own kings, and this is in XIV-XVII century. This also included Western parts of what called Ukraine today. Except Zaporozhe, which was the land of Russians (Cossaks to be exact). Poland had some agreements with Cossacs, but never “owned them”. Even in those days the lands of today’s Ukraine except for Galicja, which was a mix of Orthodox and Catholics, were Orthodox in Religion. This shows that relationship between Polish Kingdom and the “Ukrainians” was rather lose as they did not even try to force them “an masse” to become Catholics. In 1772 Tsaritsa Katerina took over the “Ukraine” with the help of Cossacs, hence Ukraine came back to mother Russia. Except of some Western parts that were grabbed by her cousin the Emperor of Hungarian-Austrian Empire. It is my belief that these parts of Ukraine are the ones made to believe their “other identity”. So, it is also my belief, that Russians can not really hate these people as they are their own, but they have to undo the brainwashing job done on these people.

Nick, not to argue with you but check out this map. This is where the the most “ukro-Nationalist” problems reside, as I said, in what used to be Red Rus. It is sad when people get brainwashed to forget their roots.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Ruthenia

For four years we have found Ishchenko’s articles the road map through the maze of Ukraine.
He’s Ukrainian, but has to work and live inside Russia.
He’s Russian but has to think like a intellectual who can separate from his patriotism. (Undiluted rationality).

We have in this work (thanks for the translation Ollie and Angelina) all the large puzzle pieces and the carefully laid out steps of solution to the maze.

In time, it will play out this way, because it is what always happens in history and human crises constructed in the way Ukraine 2014 was built. It was meant to be civil war inside the Russian world, on the border of Russia, and bait for a war that would drain and diminish and finish the Putin reign and Russian nation-state.

Of course, as Ishchenko points out, it is devouring Ukraine itself. When the body of this sick entity finally ceases to twitch, the “estate” will be probated (Russia will be the executor, of course).

The distance kept nowadays by Berlin and Paris from the mess they sponsored indicates their understanding of the failure they have wrought. Only the US and NATO think their is viability in the rot of Kiev and Banderism.

So, prepare for the likelihood that the corpse might not be ‘released’ to its kin. I suspect the US Russophobes will let it rot and decay in hopes the stench and maggots will affect Russia.

Ukraine has been about the policy of the Russophobes and Khazarians in the State Department as much as about the Banderistas and nationalist thugs, their corruption and crimes and the ethnic cleansing war against Donbass.

The country of Ukraine will have to endure a civil war the US and NATO cannot control before it dies.

And even then, if such catastrophe erupts, the US holds the end game (they think). There is Azov and Biletsky–young, handsome, fanatical, and very patient. Out of sight for some time, but the perfect man for the job when all is lost and ‘savior’ is needed. Expect Bolton will have a photo op for him in the Oval Office when the US switches tracks on Kiev.

Larch, I agree with you. All this mess was created to destroy Russian World. It has nothing to do with creation of prosperous country. Sadly enough it reminds me of what is happening to Greece. Both are kept in agony only to say that they exist.

The last sentence says it all: “They gifted us Crimea, and this isn’t their last gift”. Exactly.

As I have written before, the Western coup d’etat in Kiev in 2014 started a chain reaction which cannot be stopped. The West applied it’s Latin American method’s in regime change. It, of course, backed the oligarchs, giving the neo-Nazis the street role. It knew whom to back. It also knew about Ukraine’s 20th century history, but forgetting it’s past one.

Both the oligarchs and the neo-Nazis in Ukraine thought that the West had unlimited amount’s of money to give them, both as a gift and as a loan. It does not. And what do we have now ? A feudal state, run by robber barons, fighting over spoils. The neo-Nazis are their feudal retainers. In fact some of the oligarchs finance them.

How will this end ? Only a miracle can keep Ukraine in it’s present political and geographic form. It means that the country will have to find somebody who can subdue the oligarchs and neo-Nazis, if such a thing is possible. Then there is the question of Ukraine’s falling infrastructure. As far as I can see, Ukraine will either have to be federalized or else it will break up into three parts.

If a civil war, or major civil disturbances occur in Kiev and other cities, then the country will almost certainly break up into three parts, something analysts have been predicting for the past few years. The eastern parts will, of course, join Russia. Central Ukraine will probably do the same. This leaves western Ukraine, which will become an area of contention between Poland and Hungary. Russia can look forward to retrieving about 75 % of current Ukraine. After all, the original Russia was centered in Kiev. I wonder how many times Putin laughed when the West instigated that coup d’etat in 2014.

”Both the oligarchs and the neo-Nazis in Ukraine thought that the West had unlimited amounts of money to give them, both as a gift and as a loan”

Actually, the West would have greased its solid, dependable Ukro garbage with fabulous money handouts in case of success, most notably with regard to Crimea. The idea was, of course, to have a subjugated, rapidly disintegrating Russia pay for the Ukro gravy train. Instead, the Ukros gifted Russia Crimea, and this isn’t their last gift.

”I wonder how many times Putin laughed when the West instigated that coup d’etat in 2014.”

My guess is he laughed at least once: Victoria Nuland and her eatables proving Marie Antoinette right. Just dole out some to the slobs, and they’ll grovel at your feet doing whatever you ask of them. Maybe he laughed also at that Ukro demonstration for instant wage hikes to Western European levels. Putin: ”Have these people sold the Russian Federation to the West right under my nose?? They should have asked me, at least”.

Could well be that Marie Antoinette actually did not say that, but the significant thing here is rather that she most certainly would have survived, had she taken action the way Victoria Nuland did. The hunger and squalor tormenting the poor in 18th century France and the debauched luxury at Versailles are no unsubstantiated rumours.

Nussiminen
The French elite in 1789 destroyed itself like the Roman in 476. The Roman elite fled Rome, while the French fled it’s estates and Paris (those who did not fall into the hands of the “revolutionaries”).

When England in the 18th century was introducing the First Industrial Revolution, the chief question in France was if the aristocracy should pay taxes. In 1789 it got what it did, a “revolution” backed by the Rothschilds. Up till 1789 French finances were in royal hands, and after that in the hands of private bankers. The current “President” of France is a Rothschilds banker.

As for the US, it’s elite has apparently learned nothing from history. On the other hand, maybe it has. For years the Internet has seen articles on the US elite buying real estate in countries like New Zealand and Tasmania. Looks like the US elite is fearing something.

“Azov Battalion online propaganda shows Israeli-licensed Tavor rifles in the fascist group’s hands, while Israeli human rights activists have protested arms sales to Ukraine on the basis that weapons might end up with anti-Semitic militias.

They had written that Ukrainian armed forces use rifles made in Israel “and are trained by Israelis,” according to reports in the country.

The head of the Israeli arms export agency declined to deny the reports, or to even discuss cancellation of the weapons licenses, citing “security” concerns.

A photo on Azov’s website also shows a Tavor in the hands of one of the militia’s officers.

The rifles are produced under licence from Israel Weapon Industries, and as such would have been authorized by the Israeli government.

IWI markets the Tavor as the “primary weapon” of the Israeli special forces.

It has been used in recent massacres of unarmed Palestinians taking part in Great March of Return protests in Gaza.

Today, Azov is run by Arsen Avakov, Ukraine’s interior minister. According to the BBC, he pays its fighters, and has appointed one of its military commanders, Vadym Troyan, as his deputy – with control over the police.

Avakov last year met with the Israeli interior minister Aryeh Deri to discuss “fruitful cooperation.”

Israel’s military aid to Ukraine and its neo-Nazis emulates similar programs by the United States and other NATO countries including the UK and Canada.

Recent postings on Azov websites document a June meeting with the Canadian military attaché, Colonel Brian Irwin.

Canada is of course not the only NATO “ally” to be sending arms to Ukraine.

As Max Blumenthal has extensively reported, US weapons, including rocket-propelled grenades, and training have been provided to Azov.

Under pressure from the Pentagon, a clause in the annually renewed defense bill banning US aid to Ukraine from going to the Azov Battalion was repeatedly stripped out.

In 2014, the Israel lobby groups ADL and the Simon Wiesenthal Center refused to help a previous attempt to bar US aid to neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine.

The ADL argued that “the focus should be on Russia,” while the Wiesenthal Center pointed to the fact that other far-right leaders had met at the Israeli embassy in Ukraine – as if that somehow absolved their anti-Semitic views.

Israel’s “deepening military-technical cooperation” with Ukraine and its fascist militias is likely a way to help its partner in the White House, and is another facet of the growing Zionist-White Supremacist alliance.”

I copy and paste this clip from SyrPer, a comparison between “Ukraine” and “Donetsk People’s Republic”, without being qualified to discuss its validity. The claim that Donetz-Luhansk forced oligarch banks to disgorge pension money sounds like a fairy tale, but very interesting if true:

OLEG TSAREV: THE UAF IS TERRIFIED OF THE MILITARY POWER OF THE DONBASS REPUBLICS

The amount of military equipment that the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics possess exceeds the numbers for such NATO member states as Great Britain, Germany, or France.

According to Skibitsky, the republics of Donbass have 475 tanks, 1,000 armoured vehicles, and more than 200 MLRS and 762 artillery systems.

LOL this is the guy who a day before the coup spoke “there will be a coup” in parliament, and then got dumped in a dumpster by the maiden gangsters..

Donetz-Luhansk have miles better military strategists, better generals (‘Motorola’ et al.) and have time and again corralled the Kiev nihilist fascists, (e.g. at the famous Debaltsevo Cauldron).
Donetz-Luhansk also have much better ECONOMISTS, as even sadly deteriorated Tarpley himself reported, led by one Litvinenko, a descendant of the 1930s Soviet diplomat. Under this enlightened NON-NEO-LIBERAL planning, great new supermarkets have sprung up, while the chaos in ”Ukraine” is like the old USSR’s. There is a child endowment paid to parents and the population is growing, even under war conditions.
Donetz-Lugansk has a high rate of Ph.D. thesis authorship; it is now one of the pioneer nations in growth and in statist leadership. They seized the Kiev oligarchs’ banks and forced them to pay pensions; they are free from Rothschild poison, just like Bolivarian Venezuela and Bolivia, Cuba, Syria and China. Guess who will win?

You think it’s funny? ‘LOL this is the guy who a day before the coup spoke “there will be a coup” in parliament, and then got dumped in a dumpster by the maiden gangsters..’ How about respecting him for all he has done instead? What have you done that is comparable to him?
And it is Lugansk, not Luhansk, also not Donetz but Donetsk.

Sitemap

Saker Android App

An Android App has been developed by one of our supporters. It is available for download and install by clicking on the Google Play Store Badge above.

All the original content published on this blog is licensed by Saker Analytics, LLC under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0 International license (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0). For permission to re-publish or otherwise use non-original or non-licensed content, please consult the respective source of the content.